Of the 25 speakers, there was only 1 that I heard that was 'against'. She represented a neighborhood group, I think, and her argument was that turning over the renovation of these buildings to private development was akin to "giving away" assets. This is waterfront property. She felt that as long as the developer was profiting, then the City was losing. She implied -- though I am not sure I heard her directly say -- that the City should do the renovation.

Of course, we (incl. I think, Councilman Rasmussen) all know that the City: a) doesn't have the resources -- financial or otherwise -- to do the extensive renovations required; b) doesn't want to get into the development business, and; c) can use private money to leverage the public's return on the City's investment.

Coucilman Rasmussen was very, very supportive -- much more so than I expected. (It was my first time at one of these meetings.) So provided SSP people do their job and cover their butts, it appears to be 90% go.